SPEECH 




HON, GEORGE A. SIMMONS 

OF NEW YORK, 


GOVERNMENT ABUSES, 


DELIVERED 


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AUGUST 11, 1856, 



WASHINGTON*. 

PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE, 

1856 , 



..BWOjUCIR ;A ai :!0 T , h l| 





.-.i.'li: A Y : / i ■/ ) 


■v.yj ,|i' i- . i ’ .. •. n 1 ■ 


2 ,.,. ... .;/ . 
•t ! • ■ 




GOVERNMENT ABUSES 


The committee resumed its session at seven f 
o’clock, (Mr. Eustis in the chair,) the Presi¬ 
dent’s annual message, and the resolutions pro¬ 
posing to refer the same to the standing commit¬ 
tees, being under consideration, 

Mr. SIMMONS said: In the remarks I propose 
to submit to the committee, I design to deviate a 
little from the common track of subjects selected 
for discussion here. I thiixk there is a great ques<- 
tion underlying all these that we have been dis¬ 
cussing, not only this session, but a great many 
sessions before. I am now nearly sixty-five years 
old, and can remember very well the first election 
of Mr. Jefferson, and of all the Administrations 
down. And were it not for the fact, that while 
we are drifting along, we are not sensible of the 
changes that take place, I should be astonished at | 
comparing the present state of things with what 
used to be considered the true and correct policy 
in the years 1801-02—half a century ago. 

I propose now to make a few remarks on the 
abuses of the Federal Government, and the remedies 
therefor. ; 

It strikes me, sir, that the Federal Government, 
not simply this Congress or last Congress, but 
the whole Fedei^l Government, for a long series 
of years, has been deviating from the track 
marked out originally by our fathers. Not that ' 
I would hinder the present generation from im- f 
proving on the policy of former ones. I do not! 
believe that one generation has a right to mark I 
out exactly the lines for all their successors, but 
the most ordinary sagacity can see that a change 
has been taking place in the political and moral 
sense of the nation for many years past. We 
live not under two Governments, as people com¬ 
monly imagine—National and State. We live* 
under one Government with two branches—the 
Federal branch, and thelocal or State branch. The 
Federal branch was intended to regulate merely 
the relations of this country with foreign nations, 
and such inter-State matters as one State alone 
could not regulate without the consent of others. 

Anybody who has read the debates in the 


Federal Convention of 1789, will perceive that 
the first step taken was to pass two resolutions. 
The first was, that the Federal Government, or 
the Government of the United States, should be 
vested with all the requisite powers to regulate 
the foreign affairs—the relations between these 
States and other nations. The second was, that 
the Federal Government should regulate such 
internal affairs as concern more States than one. 
They instructed their committee to draft a Con¬ 
stitution accordingly. Any gentleman who will 
run over the enumerated powers of that instru¬ 
ment, will see that they had both these resolu¬ 
tions in their eye. You can hardly name one of 
the powers vested in Congress that is not designed 
either to regulate those things which individual 
States could not regulate, or to regulate our re¬ 
lations with foreign countries. 

This, you see, sir, is but a small portion of the 
powers exercised by the British Parliament or the 
French Parliament. Our national Government 
was created with these very limited powers, and 
the vast powers of internal government were left 
to the States. It was expected by the framers of 
the Constitution that, if the national Government 
kept itself strictly within the sphere of its powers, 
Congress would only require to sit a few weeks 
and then adjoin, whereas now it sits nearly 
three fourths of a year at its first session, and one 
fourth at its second. 

Most of the State Legislatures sit only from 
two to four months, to regulate all the various 
internal local interests of the country. These 
are constituent parts of the national Government, 
not other and distinct. They are like the pillars 
that support this Capitol—they uphold the Fed¬ 
eral Government. They are present by their 
agents in the Senate, and by their people’s Repre¬ 
sentatives in this House; and every act passed 
by Congress becomes a State law as well as a 
national one, because passed with the consent of 
all the States, as States, in the Senate, and by the 
consent of their people in the House of Represent¬ 
atives. Now, sir, how have these two branches 
of our Government, representing the same people* 










4 


operated in practice? Is the balance preserved, 
as originally intended, between the National and 
State governments? No,sir; the Federal power 
is swallowing up the States. The national branch 
of our Government receive all the revenues from 
duties on imports and the proceeds of the public 
lands. And money is power, sir. Money is 
power in proportion to its amount. The amount 
is annually increasing. 

Sir, what is the amount of these revenues ? Why, 
some seventy-five million dollars a year. When 
it was but thirteen or fourteen millions of dollars 
it was enough. When it was $25,000,000 it was 
more than enough. When it is now $75,000,000 
it is all used up; for Governments, like individ¬ 
uals, live up to their income. 

Yes, sir, you use it all up; and that income is 
worse than wasted, because it is used to corrupt 
the Government and corrupt the people. Every 
department grows greater as fast as this income 
grows larger. But two sessions since the salaries 
of the heads of departments were raised from 
$6,000 a year to $8,000; and at the last session 
the salaries of the judges of the Supreme Court 
to $6,500; about two or three times as much as 
the salaries of the State judges get for doing more 
work, and bringing to the service full as much 
talent. * 

And that is not all. Having still more money in 
the Treasury, this Government sends out its ex¬ 
peditions to Japan, Amazon, Dead Sea, or wher¬ 
ever it pleases, for the purpose of creating offices 
and spending money. Why, sir, at the last ses¬ 
sion I find—and I am surprised, for I could not 
have bee.n present when it was passed—an act was 
passed for the creation of a board to codify the laws 
\ of the District of Columbia — a board that, as 
1 far as present appearances are concerned, is to be 
perpetual—a work that would require about six 
months’ labor for one or two attorneys. But the 
board has answered its design, I suppose; offices 
were created. Now, I ask gentlemen to reflect for 
a moment, and tell me where there was ever an 
omission to create an office, or to expend money, 
when any possible excuse could be found for it? 
None at all. And yet, sir, in the administration 
of John Quincy Adams, the fact that $13,000,000 
was spent in a single year was enough to break 
down that Administration , on the ground of ex¬ 
travagance! The next Administration, I believe, 
spent $25,000,000; and so we have gone op, al¬ 
most doubling the expenses with every new Ad- 
• ministration, creating offices and raising sala¬ 
ries, until the cost and extravagance of the Gen¬ 
eral Go vernment has grown out of all proportion to 
the expenditures of the State governments. Why, 
3ir, I suppose the President of the United States 
gets as much salary as one half of the aggregate sal¬ 
aries of all the Governors of the States. I am per¬ 
fectly satisfied that the administration ofjustice in 
the State of New York, by the courts and officers 
of the United States judiciary, costs more money 
than the whole judiciary of the State. The mar¬ 
shals and other officers get such enormous sala¬ 
ries and fees for the business they do, that they 
actually go about the State getting up business 
to increase their per diem compensation. When¬ 
ever they can find any possible excuse for mak¬ 


ing complaint for any violation of law, no matter 
how frivolous, witnesses are called, and costs are 
multiplied to enable these marshals and deputies 
to earn fees. You pay your marshal, you pay 
your grand jurors, you pay your witnesses, you 
pay everybody in the employ of this Govern¬ 
ment, more than they can earn in any other busi¬ 
ness, and you make business for them. 

Again, sir, what is the use or necessity of the 
two great wings now going up to this Capitol? 
Why, sir, look at the committee-room now com¬ 
pleted in the Capitol extension. It almost sickens 
one to see the extravagance with which it is fitted 
up—to look at the ceilings painted with all kinds 
of representations of Pagan mythology, which 
have no merit in them except that they cost a 
good deal of money. I want to know by what 
authority $5,000 or $10,000 are expended in fit¬ 
ting up a single committee-room? The imagery 
is behind that of the ancient Egyptians excavated 
from the ruins three thousand years old, for we 
find in them the zodiac and other emblems illustrat¬ 
ing the seasons and other astronomical changes 
in the heavens. The Government of the United 
States contrives in various ways to get rid of its 
money. It has of late hit on a plan to succeed 
rapidly in what it seems to desire. Buildings for 
court-rooms, custom-houses, and post offices, at 
a cost each of fifty to one hundred thousand dol¬ 
lars, are being built in most of the large towns in 
every State, and that, too, within a same’s throw 
from buildings erected by the States, v hich might 
be used just as well. AH have contributed their 
shares of money to fill up the Treasury; .nd there 
being no other way to obtain a division, every 
tax-payer and every locality is naturally very de¬ 
sirous to get its share back. My district obtained 
one of these buildings. The district of the gen¬ 
tleman from Virginia [Mr. Smith] also obtained 
one at the same time, and, as long as the national 
Treasury is full, we all, Virginians as well as 
others, must come in for our share. 

Then, sir, another method for depleting the 
Treasury is the book resolutions so much favored 
by Congress. When the publication of a book * 
is ordered we must of necessity have a large 
number of copies; for if we send to one con¬ 
stituent we must to another. Yet the books 
ordered, if put up at sale, would not bring twenty- 
five cents on a dollar of the co#t. Mr. Chair¬ 
man, in this manner the Federal Government 
manages to use up all its income. When our 
income shall amount to $150,000,000, instead of 
$75,000,000, we shall use it all up as we do our 
present income. Now, sir, what makes this vast 
expenditure so censurable is, that we do not apply 
it to the right objects, and in just proportions to 
the people; not to the aid of internal improve¬ 
ments, nor to all parts of the country, old States 
and new ones, in just proportions, or on sys¬ 
tematic principles. And yet the national Gov¬ 
ernment disclaims the power to make internal 
improvements. With what jealousy does that 
Government look on a system of internal im¬ 
provements? Appropriation bills for the purpose 
of internal improvements are vetoed. The power 
is denied as unconstitutional. 

Now, look at the States, and think of their 







5 


scanty means. They have everything to do, and 
nothing to do it with. They uphold the admin¬ 
istration of justice within their limits, found and 
maintain schools and colleges, construct high¬ 
ways and canals, and preserve a good police. 
Whence do they get their means ? They have ot 
tax the people over again, after paying to the 
national Treasury $75,000,000. The people are 
subjected to additional taxation for the purposes 
of the State governments and all those internal 
improvements. Now, sir, the natural fund to 
support all governments, national and local, Fed¬ 
eral and State, is duties on imports. Enough is 
received yearly into the Federal Treasury to 
maintain both governments in a fair Jeffersonian 
way, and to construct all necessary, national im¬ 
provements. But the General Government dis¬ 
claims the power under the Constitution to make 
internal improvements, and throws it upon the 
States. The States cannot tax the people to such 
extent over again, and consequently have to run 
into debt, and repudiate, like Mississippi and 
Illinois, from necessity no doubt, or saddle them¬ 
selves with mortgages like Pennsylvania, New 
York, and Virginia, perhaps never to be paid. 
Thus, one branch of our Government receives 
twice too much, and the other twice too little. 

Talking of the waste of the public money, gen¬ 
tleman ask, why not take off all your tariff, and 
resort to direct taxation ? Because, sir, the peo¬ 
ple will not submit to it. The national fund for 
the support of this Government, and all other 
Governments in the world foryoung nations,such 
as ours is, is duties paid on imports. We are in 
our infancy. We have not the necessary subdi¬ 
vision of labor nor the maturity of the arts to 
bear a repeal of all tariff laws in favor of foreign 
labor and capital. We do not intend to allow our 
arts and manufactures to be swamped by the in¬ 
undation of foreign importations free of taxation. 
Why is this not the best policy, if the duties on 
imports are sufficient for both State and Federal 
Government? The money will be saved in the 
pockets of the people as well as if the duties were 
imposed and the people taxed directly. 

But what shall we all come to at this rate, when 
it becomes necessary to sustain a great standing 
Army and Navy? We are now insulated from 
the great Powers of Europe. We have no Army 
and Navy. Our Army is not equal to a London 
police; and the President admits, that our Navy 
is not ten per centum of that of Russia; but it is 
large enough for us, because of our insulation and 
our means of rallying, when necessary, our 
militia and privateers. Mr. Jefferson was right. 
We can never keep up a great Army and Navy 
except at the hazard of losing our free institu¬ 
tions. We do keep up, however, an army of 
office-holders for doing very little service on very 
large salaries. We pay twice the price paid by 
the States for the same services; and the States 
themselves pay twice as much as individuals have 
to pay for the same. 

Now, sir, if this extravagant expenditure of 
the Federal (government is a great and growing 
evil, what is our remedy? The idea of taking 
off all the duties upon imports, with a trifling ex¬ 
ception, and then resorting to direct taxation to 


carry on the Government, is a thing so alien to 
the common practice of the world, and the com¬ 
mon sense of everybody but metaphysicians, 
that no man can think the people will consent 
to it. I remember some years ago gentlemen 
talked about abolishing the tariff, and resorting 
to direct taxation to support the Government. I 
believe a distinguished gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Calhoun) used to advocate this 
doctrine; but is there one single man of business 
and practical habits in the country who has the 
least idea that such a scheme can ever be real¬ 
ized, at least in the present stage of our country’s 
progress ? Aof one. The remedy we want is this. 
We ought to divide the surplus revenue received from 
duties on imports, and from the sales of public lands , 
among the States. I think it could be done by an 
act of Congress, so that one half the net proceeds 
should be paid over quarterly as fast as received, 
into the State Treasuries, according to their Fed¬ 
eral representation. If we could get that scheme 
started, and get it well in motion, we should find 
a reform commenced immediately. It would be 
found impracticable to enlarge the number of 
officers to perform very little service. It would 
be found impracticable to enlarge salaries all the 
time from year to year. We should have econ¬ 
omy reigning in our national Government, and 
in the mean time the people would be gradually 
relieved from direct taxes under the State govern¬ 
ments, wfiichhave now to be paid to support these 
governments, and make internal improvements. 
^Now, whether this division of the proceeds of 
the revenue should be confined to times of peace, 
and leave it open in time of war, would be a ques¬ 
tion worthy of consideration. I think it should 
be made applicable only to times of peace, so 
that, if the General Government should find a 
necessity of having more revenue for unavoid¬ 
able and necessary wars, they could take it. The 
effect of such a statute as that, if we could pass 
it—and we have. a precedent for it in General 
Jackson’s time—would be to put a stop to a world 
of evils which we now suffer. There is no place 
in the General Government but has got to be so 
important on account of the pecuniary advant¬ 
ages connected with it, that it helps to create an 
excitement of party spirit all over the country. 
This country is all divided into parties simply by 
means of this very corrupting influence of the 
Treasury. A celebrated nobleman in England, 
Lord Brougham, a member of the House of Lords, 
in the first volume of his Political Philosophy— 
which is in your Library—speaking of the effect 
of parties in the United States of America, says 
it is the very extreme. He says they are continued 
from one four years to another in a party squab¬ 
ble to see which party shall get possession of the 
Treasury under the presidential question; and 
that it must, sooner or later, if not corrected, 
prove the downfall of the Republic. I do not 
quote him, of course, as conclusive authority; 
but only to show that our example is exciting 
the attention of the world. 

The course I have indicated would put a check 
to a good many evils. It would discourage many 
of these filibustering operations we hear about 
so often after more territory—more territory, sir. 










6 


One of the great difficulties which we have to 
combat now is the immense extent of territory 
we have at the West, and the tendency to disper¬ 
sion of our population all over the western world. 
Instead of building up, we are building out, and 
appropriating vast sums of money and vast quan¬ 
tities of land in the West to the making of new 
States. Would it not be as well to think a little 
of our old homestead States, and see if something 
cannot be done for them ? Our great thorough¬ 
fares, by railroad, from the East to the West, 
serve chiefly to empty our old States of their 
increasing population and wealth, from year to 
year, and scatter them through the western wil¬ 
derness; and that, in turn, makes it necessary to 
grant more lands and moneys there for railroads 
and other improvements. 

There is one doctrine of Scripture which the 
politics of this country seem to have adopted, if 
no other; and that is, the abandonment of selfish¬ 
ness; for it is very difficult to conceive of a nation 
which takes so little care of its homesteads—the 
old States—and is all the time looking to the new 
States—to Kansas and New Mexico, and every 
other place, for a new State in the wilderness— 
instead of leaving them to grow up by the natural 
onward course of events. So every candidate 
for the Presidency must get up a character for 
doing all he can to make new States. I have 
not time now to go further into this question, 
but I will state it more fully in my published 
remarks. 

I wish now to speak of one or two other things. 
Only see what an effect this immense receipt into 
the Treasury of the United States has upon the 
Government itself! Why, sir, it is destroying 
the balance of power entirely between the United 
States and the States. The States are like so many 
paupers, always applying to this Government for 
something or other, drummingup dormant claims, 
and in various ways trying to draw something 
out of an overflowing Treasury. Instead of the 
States being on a perfect footing of equality and 
independence with the Government of the Union, 
they are seen with their hats under their arms, 
in attendance at Washington, playing second 
fiddle to this Government. 

The connection of the national Government 
with the States is now a good deal like a partner¬ 
ship between thirty-one gentlemen, who should 
put their stuff into the concern, and go on swim- 
mingly as a firm, making great profits, but re¬ 
fusing to make any dividends among themselves, 
and, in order to maintain their families, have to 
run into debt, and then cheat their butchers and 
bakers out of their bills, just as Illinois and Mis¬ 
sissippi had to stop payment. 

But there is another thing that shows up the 
aggrandizement of the Union at the expense of 
the States, and shows the growing ascendency 
of the national Executive over the national Legis¬ 
lature; in other words, the tendency to monarchy 
in the Federal Government. It is this: every¬ 
body knows that the Governor of a State is sim¬ 
ply the officer elected to execute the laws. He 
does not give force and character to the policy of 
the State. The Legislature of the State originates 
its policy, not the Executive. 1 Some years ago 


we had in the State of New York a Governor by 
the name of De Witt Clinton, who had consider¬ 
able influence over the public measures of the 
State; and yet we never attributed to him, or his 
administration, the policy carried out under him. 
The canal policy was that of the people, or their 
representatives. It was expected to be so with 
the national Government by its framers; but how 
do we find it? So far from it, that it has now 
ceased to be a matter of much importance as to 
the qualifications of a candidate for Congress; but 
the great question is, whether he will support or 
oppose the Administration. 

We have got now into that condition with our 
national Government where the balance of power 
is completely reversed, and where, instead of the 
Legislature being looked to as the supreme power 
to originate the policy and measures of the Gov¬ 
ernment, as it was when it was first constituted, 
it is all now to’be done by the Executive, and the 
Legislative has become, if not subservient, at 
least only secondary and auxiliary to the Execu¬ 
tive. It is now-a-days considered to be very 
important to spend half the time in Congress 
making Buncombe speeches and electioneering for 
the Presidency. Montesquieu says somewhere, 
that whenever a Legislature of a country becomes 
subservient to the Executive, no matter what 
name the government goes by, it is a monarchy. 
And whenever the representatives of the people 
here, through the agency of party, become the 
mere subservient supporters of an Administration, 
then, it seems to me, we are on the rapid road to 
monarchy. I believe Montesquieu says further, 
somewhere, that the British Government is a 
republic under the disguise of a monarchy; and 
I am afraid that some other Montesquieu will 
very soon have to say that America is a monarchy 
under the disguise of a republic. This evil 
springs, sir, out of the immense patronage of the 
President. 

Sir, what is the amount of this patronage ? Not 
less than $200,000,000 a year. What a tremen¬ 
dous corrupting influence that is ! I am not cen¬ 
suring the present Administration for all this; 
because President Pierce did not begin it; his ad¬ 
ministration is only one link in the chain. We have 
been drifting for many years towards this state of 
things. The patronage of the national Govern¬ 
ment corrupts the press, and corrupts the people, ' 
corrupts the State governments, and corrupts the 
members of Congress. About two years ago, I 
saw an advertisement in the Union newspaper of 
this city, that no person whoyoted against a cer¬ 
tain bill could expect his friends to be retained 
in any Department of the Government. A certain 
gentleman—a member of this House, with whom 
I was well acquainted, and who had expressed 
himself to me in strong terms against that bill, 
turned clear round within three days, and voted 
otherwise. And I knew all the time, that he had 
a relative in one of the Departments at a salary 
of $1,400. y 

But, sir, here is another thing going to show 
that the executive branch of the Federal Govern¬ 
ment lias drifted faraway from its first moorings. 

I am not accusing any particular Administration 
or officer. I am not sure but this may have begun 










I 


under General Washington. It was, at all events, 
a great mistake. The Constitution requires that 
persons nominated for office by the President 
shall be confirmed by the consent of the Senate. 
The Constitution does not expressly say how 
they shall bj^ removed; but does any gentleman 
doubt its spirit and meaning—that if we had now 
to form a new constitution, should we require 
appointments to be confirmed by the Senate, and 
yet give the President the power of dismissal 
without the consent of the Senate? Just see 
what that construction of the Constitution, 
allowing removals by the Executive alone, with¬ 
out the Senate, has lead us to. It is the moving 
power of party spirit, and the great object of party 
combinations. 

The very fact, that the President has power to 
remove everybody from office without cause 
shown, is conclusive proof of his power to con¬ 
trol political opinion through them and their 
friends. It is a power which leads to that violent 
party action which prevails everywhere in this 
country, and which has become so dangerous 
even to the Union itself. If we had adhered to 
the original, plain import of the Constitution, 
and the President had claimed only the power of 
suspending officers until a meeting of Congress, 
and then required the consent of the Senate for 
their removal, it would have taken from party 
machinery its moving power. It would then 
have been a difficult thing to remove any officer 
except for incompetency and dereliction of duty, 
and we should have been relieved from this con¬ 
tinual change of office-holders every four years 
for party purposes. Whenever a new President 
is elected, everything is changed, because that is 
what the party fought for. To the victors belong 
the spoils! 

But that is not all. The power of the President 
is not only increased by the enormous patronage 
which he exercises—and his patronage is as great, 
if not greater than that of any other one man liv¬ 
ing—but it is increased from another source; I 
will not call it usurpation , but a power of much 
greater magnitude than people generally imagine. 
I allude to the message power. The Constitution 
makes it the duty of the President to make a 
report or statement of the situation of the public 
affairs at the meeting of each session of Congress, 
and to recommend such measures as he may deem 
expedient. Well, sir, there is nothing extraor¬ 
dinary or unusual in that. The same.thing is 
done by the heads of the Government in France, 
in England, and in other Governments; but in 
those countries the messages are required to 
be brief, and confined to a simple statement of 
facts,and brief suggestion of measures. Wash¬ 
ington understood what was expected of him, as 
President, by the framers of the Constitution, 
and his messages were rarely more than short 
hints, brief statements, and brief suggestions. 


7 


r-;-;---—- 

But now this power is carried to such an extent, 
that the President and the heads of the several 
Departments, who sympathize with him, act 
together in getting up a message, and not only 
give a detailed account of the condition of the 
country, and specific announcement of measures, 
but an elaborate argument upon every point, pa¬ 
rading a sort of party platform to be adopted. 
And what is the effect? The message goes to the 
country unanswered; and you cannot expect the 
people to keep their minds open and unbiased 
until they have an opportunity of reading the 
scattered replies from individual members of 
Congress manymoirths afterwards. In the days 
of General Washington, the President’s message 
was always accompanied by the answer of the 
two Houses. But, now, this wholesome practice 
is discontinued, and the message power has grown 
into a great party engine over the people as well 
as the Congress. 

It seems to me that this power is too vast. It 
ought to be limited to a simple statement of facts, 
and the suggestion of measures, without argu¬ 
ment or comment, and always to be answered by 
the two Houses. 

The English people have always been exceed- 
ingly jealous of this message power; and for that 
reason the House of Commons would never allow 
the King to make a long, set speech, or do more 
than to present a simple statement of facts, and 
brief suggestion of measures. They would never 
allow him, by the aid of his ministers, to make 
an elaborate argument to go to the people unan¬ 
swered. But in this country, the representa¬ 
tives of the people are become so subservient 
to the executive recommendations unanswered , 
that even in this House nothing can be carried, 
in the shape of an appropriation, until we as¬ 
certain whether it has been recommended by 
the Executive, or some of the Executive Depart¬ 
ments. 

There should certainly be a harmonious un¬ 
derstanding between the Executive Departments 
and the Legislature; we want their knowledge of 
facts, and should always obtain it; we need, too, 
all the reports from the Departments accompany¬ 
ing the message; but those are enough. But the 
message itself should be short, and never go to the 
country unanswered by Congress, if we mean to 
preserve the power and influence of the Legisla¬ 
ture, and save the country from sliding into a 
monarchy, or something worse. 

But all this is trifling, compared to the patron¬ 
age of the Executive. It is this that creates and 
perpetuates party power, corrupting everything 
it touches; corrupts the press, the people, the Con¬ 
gress, the State Governments, and prostrates the 
national Legislature at the feet of the national 
Executive. It corrupts the morals even of the 
people themselves, and perverts the moral sense 
of the nation. 


4 


« 















LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



0 028 070 994 3 


* 










1 


A 







> 




» 


V 






<* 


0 






t 















